Great MIT Info Session

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

<p>We attended a packed and informative info session last night and it really shed some light on MIT. I thought I already knew lots about MIT, but I learned lots more. Here are some things that stuck in my head...
* You don't need a major as an incoming freshman at MIT. Everyone is viewed as "undeclared" by the admissions folks, though they do ask for an intended major on the app. In other words, don't think the major you indicate on your app influences your application significantly. During your first year at MIT you will shop for a major.
* You just need to have competitive test scores and grades to be seriously considered for admission. After that it's all about the fit. Don't sweat a few points here and there.
* MIT is an athletic and active campus. They have 5 levels of intermural ice hockey, underwater scuba hockey, and an amazingly strong varsity sports program. Hiding in your dorm room and doing math problems all night is not the MIT way. I especially liked that.
* Finally, MIT is about collaboration, not competition. That's the primary reason freshmen don't get letter grades is to build that culture. I thought they didn't give letter grades the first year was because it was sooooo hard. </p>

<p>Anyway, that's what I understood and I hope it's right. Also, don't fret if you can't make an info session in your town. All of what was said last night and more appears on the MIT website and various blogs. Good luck to everyone who is considering making MIT their home for the next 4 years.</p>

2

<p>"You just need to have competitive test scores and grades to be seriously considered for admission"--like it goes by rounds? like: first the basic school stuffs, and then they select the top and then look into ec's etc.? Thanks!</p>

3

<p>Here's what I know, from Matt</a> McGann's blog:

[quote]

In a nutshell, here's how selection works. We've spent a month reading and crafting great summaries of your applications, and now we take those summaries and work from them. We do selection in subcommittees, usually of three people -- I've been lucky enough to work so far with Stu, Quinton, Salvador (the admissions officer formerly known as Juan), and Amy, making for great subcommittee dynamics. Each subcommittee will take each case in random order, read aloud the summary, check out the coursework and grades, and then have a discussion about that applicant. Things are by consensus -- we have everyone on the subcommittee agree what the right action (admit, defer, deny) is. Because we have a clear idea of what we are looking for in MIT students (if you've come to an information session or read MyMIT, you know what I mean), we can usually reach consensus after a bit of discussion without needing to resort to a formal "vote." In the very rare occasion where we can't reach consensus, we put the application back in the stack for another subcommittee to decide on. Then we take the next case and repeat the above, iterated over all of the different subcommittees, which are intentionally randomized each half day or so.

[/quote]
</p>